I am not so sure this is a fair comparison. One thing I think it lacks is patronage competitors (and thus competition).
The article seemed to indicate (unwillingly) that it was a unique combination of non-reproducible scenarios i.e. talent and talent scout. It's not like there weren't other places with other talent and patrons.
Also SV teaches us the exact opposite since it didn't start with a city with lots of money and lots of patrons (they came over time)
I think a much more likely explanation is the same that spur many other sudden sparks excellence within a short time and geographic location and that is. Some sort of right combination of progress in a number of fields, the availability of money and a fairly progressive time in history in that area.
I.e. luck more than anything else. (Just like nation building btw)